Fishing Life Madness?

[maxima12]

Let's make it perfectly clear! Reason --- Fishing, then a little more, "FLYFISHING".

Question 1 - Why do you want to do it?

Question 2 - Are you willing to save it?

I can't believe how these 2 questions lined up! But, never the less, I was thinking of these right now! Today @ 5:39 12- 16- 2019.

Maxima12

 

[edinfly]

1. I like wading in streams. If trout fishing were outlawed, I’d still hike in the woods and wade in streams.

2. I like to interact with my environment in a deliberate way.

3. I like the complexity of the challenge.

4. I like that even though I’m not very good at it, it’s still fun.

5. I like the people I meet—in fly shops, on the stream, etc.

 

[jifigz]

1) I do it because I've been an obsessive angler since about the 2nd grade.

2) I didn't realize that it was in Jeopardy of vanishing/failure any time soon.

 

[HopBack]

2) I didn't realize that it was in Jeopardy of vanishing/failure any time soon.

I believe he thinks declining revenues from the PFBC = less stocked fish=less participation in the sport and ultimately the fishing experience as he knows it.

 

[jifigz]

HopBack wrote:

2) I didn't realize that it was in Jeopardy of vanishing/failure any time soon.

I believe he thinks declining revenues from the PFBC = less stocked fish=less participation in the sport and ultimately the fishing experience as he knows it.

True Hopback, true. I couldn't care less about that. If they get so broke they couldn't stock a trout I wouldn't care. Fish and fishing will be fine. They could go out of business entirely and things would be just fine.

 

[silverfox]

jifigz wrote:

HopBack wrote:

2) I didn't realize that it was in Jeopardy of vanishing/failure any time soon.

I believe he thinks declining revenues from the PFBC = less stocked fish=less participation in the sport and ultimately the fishing experience as he knows it.

True Hopback, true. I couldn't care less about that. If they get so broke they couldn't stock a trout I wouldn't care. Fish and fishing will be fine. They could go out of business entirely and things would be just fine.

Ain't that the truth.

At some point it will reach critical mass. When the cost per trout for trout production reaches the point where there is no way they could raise license costs enough to stay afloat, they'll have to do something else. I wish that would happen in my lifetime, but I doubt it.

@Maxima12

A1: To be at one with nature and escape the daily grind.

A2: Define "it".

 

[Lkyboots]

Trout fishing has kept me going for 60 years. Fly fishing for Trout has been 90% of my fishing for the last 50 years. I d have to say being able to tie my own flies and then the challenge of reading the water and adapting to each stretch of stream makes it more interesting then sitting in a boat.

If I couldn't fish for Trout I'd be happy catching sunfish or Bass with a light bamboo rod.

 

[jifigz]

Lkyboots wrote:
Trout fishing has kept me going for 60 years. Fly fishing for Trout has been 90% of my fishing for the last 50 years. I d have to say being able to tie my own flies and then the challenge of reading the water and adapting to each stretch of stream makes it more interesting then sitting in a boat.

If I couldn't fish for Trout I'd be happy catching sunfish or Bass with a light bamboo rod.

Guess what? The PFBC has absolutely zero say in if you can fish for trout or not. Nature has us covered because PA is a trout blessed state. Wild fish will do better without stockies.

 

[maxima12]

Ha, Ha, Ha, i got a chuckle from the previous posts. " What he thinks".

Well, thank you for telling me what i think! If you only knew what i am thinking now!

Fishing experience as i know it. I know it, very, very well. Best of all, i know it enough not to ruin it!

You say, Fish Commission, hope it fails. Wishing this is a failure on your part. With that said. If we ever fish the same stream and you see me, please do not try and get friendly. Simply cross the stream to the opposite side!

Maxima12

 

[jifigz]

If you're referring to me Maxi, I didn't say (or anyone else, for that matter) that we hope the PFBC fails. I don't hope that because the PFBC does good work and accomplishes some nobody goals. I simply stated the fact that without them trout and trout fishing would be just fine. Arguably, trout and trout fishing may even be better.

 

[Nymph-wristed]

I just look damn sexy in waders, especially with Simms male camel toe. And with this beard, it was either fly fishing or working in a coffee shop.

I don't agree with everything PFBC, nor TU, nor the industry (partnering with every beer and alcohol company, for example) but they have the means and the motivation, even if it's self-preservation, to "save" the sport. I will just fish with respect and appreciate for what we have and try to pass on what I know to as many fishermen as possible.

 

[HopBack]

Ha, Ha, Ha, i got a chuckle from the previous posts. " What he thinks".

You have made it perfectly clear your position on stocking and the PFBC. I am not making any assumptions... example:

You stated in previous posts that you think its wrong to stop stocking Penns creek because kids will loose interest in fishing and it will all go down hill from there.....or something like that.

It's been the same story with all of your other maniacal ramblings, all pushing the same agenda.


Bottom line, I respect your opinion and I support the PFBC and some forms of stocking. I don't wish them to fail at all.

Oh and don't worry Maxi, if I ever see you in my lifetime it will probably be too soon! No hard feelings!

 

[troutbert]

jifigz wrote:


I didn't realize that it was in Jeopardy of vanishing/failure any time soon.

The OP doesn't support the idea that fishing is in jeopardy of vanishing any time soon.

And doesn't even TRY to support that idea.

 

[maxima12]

Oh yeah, the feathers are ruffled and the hair is standing straight! Good! I always liked that! Kind of elimates the simple talk! We know where we stand!

Somehow, it never fails, The good and the bad, join someday, to be the Ugly! Too soon? A lifetime has been built on the "Too Soons".

Too soon we will unite!

Maxima12

 

[maxima12]

What is OP, does it mean oppossing propaganda?

Maxima12

 

[troutbert]

maxima12 wrote:
What is OP, does it mean oppossing propaganda?

Maxima12

OP = original post

"Question 2 - Are you willing to save it?"

Save it from what?

 

[jifigz]

troutbert wrote:

"Question 2 - Are you willing to save it?"

Save it from what?

Since you pointed out that my assumption of losing angling opportunities clearly wasn't right why do you need to ask? Shouldn't you already know? He was obviously referring to angling and the future of the hobby and it isn't in any way in trouble.

So, since I wasn't right the first time, I believe he is talking about rhinoceroses and their future from poachers before it is too late. Sorry, I'm just tugging on your pole......

 

[ryansheehan]

troutbert wrote:

jifigz wrote:


I didn't realize that it was in Jeopardy of vanishing/failure any time soon.

The OP doesn't support the idea that fishing is in jeopardy of vanishing any time soon.

And doesn't even TRY to support that idea.

To me if you ask "are you willing to save it?" you're implying it's in danger.

 

[troutbert]

jifigz wrote:

troutbert wrote:

"Question 2 - Are you willing to save it?"

Save it from what?

Since you pointed out that my assumption of losing angling opportunities clearly wasn't right why do you need to ask? Shouldn't you already know? He was obviously referring to angling and the future of the hobby and it isn't in any way in trouble.

So, since I wasn't right the first time, I believe he is talking about rhinoceroses and their future from poachers before it is too late. Sorry, I'm just tugging on your pole......

I wasn't referring to you. I was referring to the OP (original post).

That talked about "saving" fishing. Which IMPLIED that it needs to be saved from something.

But it did not SUPPORT the idea that it needs to be saved from something.

It didn't state what dangers he thinks threaten fishing.

Why he thinks these things are threats.

And what solutions he is proposing to "save" fishing.

 

[jifigz]

Ummmm.....I'm not sure I follow your last post Troutbert. Maxi said "save" which usually implies something is in peril or danger from some threat. The only other use I can think of is setting aside time/money or something. So, given Maxi's last posts, he is implying that fishing is in trouble because of lack of participation due to decreased stocking/revenue. HopBack pointed this out and Maxi's stand I'd well known. Like nearly every post written by Maxima it is plagued by vague obscurity and ambiguity.